Yes, they’ve done it - introduced ANOTHER pre-emptive law, like the ban on certain substances (you know, the notion that if we allow drugs like cannabis or cocaine then people may commit crimes and therefore we should pre-empt it by making the drug illegal - strange they never applied the same to alcohol). They have now introduced a ban, starting today in the UK, which makes it illegal to use a hand-held cellphone while driving. The logic? Well, statistics show that you are more likely to have an accident by up to four times if you are talking into a hand-held cellphone at the time. The same people who pressured the government to ban hand-held cellphones are also asking them to ban hands-free cellphones too while driving. The logic? Well, any distractions are clearly bad. Best to do away with all phones in cars. Pretty soon, the words ‘phone’ and ‘driving’ will be as loaded as ‘drink’ and ‘driving’ - it will be a practice regarded as only ever done by irresponsible people.

OK! So lets get down to brass tacks here. By what facet of weird law-making logic do these control freaks separate out using a cellphone from unwrapping a Mars bar and eating it? Or eating fries from a drive-thru on a long distance journey? Or feeling in jacket pockets for a handkerchief? Or simply taking a sip of Coke? If they also seek to ban hands-free phones, by what glutton of faulty logic do they separate that from using an in-car navigation system, or flicking through channels on a car stereo? Or even simply LISTENING to the car stereo, since it is the distraction-factor that their arguments object against? Are they now going to ban Mars bars, fries, Cokes, handkerchiefs, car stereos, navigation systems or anything else which is a potential distraction from the road?

The simple fact of the matter is that the law becomes ridiculous when it strays from CONCEPTS based on principal, into complicated ‘pragmatic’ SOLUTIONS based on the latest reports or statistics. Of course cellphones should not be banned from use while driving, anymore than simply getting something from the glove box should be. If people are wobbling down the street looking like they are about to cause an accident, then they should be prosecuted for dangerous driving, but pre-emptive action is a step that should be regarded as outside of the government’s jurisdiction. It should be outside their area of influence and control.

I really, really like Tony Blair - I feel he has been an excellent statesman and an example of a great ambassador for the UK and for morality when it comes to some areas like foreign policy - but his leftiness is like a Westlife album dropped in the ocean… it is full of stuff that sounds new, but is actually mostly rehashed drivel, floating around with no obvious or lasting direction. It’s the latest from the wishy-washy, leftist control freakery which is New Labour.

I’d better start my campaign NOW in advance of their next release, called ‘Save Our Car Stereos’.

———————-
John Wright

johnwright@softhome.net